The Sun. — London, England, 1836-05-10 00:00:00

pense ; and the argument might he allowed to termi nate here. But let us look at the matter financially, and we shall then perceive that the vicious principle on which the duty is based, as in all other cases where common sense is violated by absurd restrictions on commercial transactions, defeats its own object. It is defective, taking the narrowest view of it, as a financial measure. In proof that the tax has failed, Mr. Ro binson stated " that in the year 1832, the exports of this country amounted to 88,000,0001., and the stamp duties raised on marine insurances amounted to 300,0001. In the year 1833, the exports had advanced to 120,000,0001., and instead of there being, as might be expected, a proportional advance in the amount of the tax to 400,000/., it had actually fallen to 200,000/." There is no occasion to adduce any additional matter of fact to •show the abortive impolicy of the tax. We might enforce the argument by the inference that foreigners, who otherwise would insure their property in this country, are deterred from doing so by this tax. But no better criterion of the impolicy of a tax can be adduced than the striking fact above quoted—shr'w ing a diminution of the tax keeping pace with an augmentation of the commercial transactions on which that tax is laid. In conclusion, we shall merely say, that we leave the matter with confidence in the hands of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. We are per fectly convinced that he shares the liberal opinions placed on record by several of his colleagues as con cerns the financial impolicy of the duties in question ; for not only is the Lord Advocate understood to have expressed similar opinions in the Edinburgh Review, but the President of the Board of Trade, Mr. P. Thomson, in his speech made in March, 1830, and Sir Henry Parnell, in his admirable work " On Fi nance," deprecated the' pernicious absurdity of these ditties, and urged the necessity of their early abrog'a tioit.—Morning Advertiser. ,1 • Y , • 3 . t ~, i . 4 1 N SUN OFFICE, Seven o' clock. • _ ME LONDON GAZETTE THIS EVENING. LORD CHAMBERLAIN'S OFFICE, MAY 10. The Lord Chamberlain of .cis Majr sty's Household has appointed John Luster, Esq., on' of the Gentleman Ushers Quarterly Waiters in Ordinary to his Majesty, in the room of Robert Browne, Esq, deceased ; and Arthur Illackwoad, Esq., one of the Grooms of his Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Chamber in Ordinary, i•s the room of Thomas Shiffner, Esq., deceased. WITITEHAL! ,-, MAN' 6 The Lord Chancellor ir.;.s appointed James Mavehell Harrison, of Floakburgb, near Mvcrstonn, in the county of Lancaster, Gent., to be a Master Extraardmary tliz High Co irt of Ch ineery. DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY. JOHN lIAGGER,AmouI, Burnt•. MINKRITT CTIARLES BERRY, statiTaer, Birmingham. J olN ..1,,5-rnailliraturor . , Birmingham. GEGRGE SHUFFL'F.B ii".l3.r, coath-bail&r, 'AfaHes flelitA Cheshire. GEORGE STRUTTON, tavern-lieerer, Chester, THOMAS MARSDEN, Lias-:11;:;t! RICHARD FURNESS, Pr ,liker. Salford. ;tfn, Laucasilirc., CeURSL' OF .EXCHA N (E.— Arnmerdatn .......... I Lco,1:: , 11•ttn, at siry9t F:ottt A i&tw erp tiam'hurg ..... Alton, Par: S' gilt ... ..411; 3.; TH/S DA Y.) per oz. I%_''i i thl ! Ulu .t:trwit , ,,..„, Frohlort4,4 Main.", Es, NI. r 4 Poei,latigh, rade ...... OUs li) 0 11,r11ti I'iettit.i, e ;ii•etive a.....:2 Al l; ', 1.) T r i e . tt . data fri ;1 Madrid lr,r:ti ; vatcF OF BULLION, PER OZ. Cadiz •'''" i- Portugal 1:..1.1, ruin Cu 0 I) 11 , 11,1,1 1-1 rreinna 'in: 4 ; N; , w I)tAI1doons S.vibe cnski INew Dollars L,ibrultar ~ 5 1 0 , ~ Ditto —.— NiarsviilE., 2119. •_?.; Lienins A days' .. 1,`4 DUBLIN ELECTION COMMITTEE. (Tpts DAY.) The Committee met this rarrning at ttelve o'clock, The parties being crpatl at Vie aljournrnent on Monday, Counsel on behalf of Mr. O'Connell proceeded this morning with their scrutiny, and ob*fe:l to the vote of Christopher Dempsey onsaccount of corrupt practices and bribery at the election. • The evidence in this case - was placed upon .the rejected sheet by the Commissioners in Dublin, on the ground of the witness, who was the voter himself, having made an affidavit of the circumstances some time before the period of his examina tion, to which he subsequently deposed. Mr. AUSTEN argued at considerable length, contending that the fact of an affidavit having been read did not warraat the Commissioners in the course they had taken. It wa.','• in point of fact nothing more than the communication between the agents and witnesses in a case, so that they might be pre pared at the trial. There was no variance in the swearing of the witne7zses before the Commissioners and what he stated in his affidavit, and that affidavit was not used for the purpose of refreshing - the witness's recollection. Ile contended that the Commissioners were not justified by any principle of law in rejecting the evidence. 'Mr. TIT ES ‘7IC;ET; replied. The Committee decided that the evidence shoUld be re ceived, but they would require strong corroblrative testimony. Mr. HUTTON proceeded to read the evidence when our re porter left. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour. Mr. WILLIAMS presented a petition against certain clausas in the Midland Counties Railway Rill. On the motion of Mr. GLADSTON - E the Leicester Small Debts Bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. BAR NA RD presented a petition from Deptford against the Deptford Pier Junction Railway Bill. MIDLAND COUNTIES RAILWAY COMMITTEE. Mr. GISBOIINE brought up the Report of the Midland Counties Railway Committee. The Report stated that three witnesses summoned to appear before the Committee had re fused to attend. Mr. TOOKE presen4ei a petition from the proprietors of the Croydon Canal, against the Croydon Railway. Major BE A UCL ERK presented a petition in favour of the South Eastern Railway. On the motion of Mr. O'CONNELL the Dublin and Drogheda Railway Committee were empowered to allow the evidence taken before it to be printed at the expense of the parties. The Hon. and Learned Member then moved for leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the Dublin Steam Packet Company, notwithstanding the time for bringing in private bills had expired. The former Bill provided that no sub scriber should be responsible beyond the amount of his sub scription, and on that ground the •Bill was rejected. The Company had previously made contracts to the amount of 137,000/., and the object they had in view was to enable them to apply the capital already subscribed to fulfil their contracts. The Bill before brought in created a limited responsibility, and it was rejected for no other reason than that it created a species of monopoly. It did not create any monopoly. The proposal he intended to submit to the House was, to ask for leave to bring in a Bill, so that any person might be in possession of the real contents of the Bill. No argument could now be used against this Bill, as he only asked for leave to bring it in. The moment it was brought in, ns it was already printed, it would be deposited in the Private Bill Oaice. When that was done, the controversy, if there should be any, might arise upon the Bill when it was regularly before the House. By the present Bill, every person who stipscribed the smallest amount was liable to the extent of his entire fortune. Under these circumstances, lie hoped that the House would allow the Bill to be brought in, as the rejection of the former Bill had placed the Company in a situation of great embarrassment, and had caused very considerable injury to the people of Ireland. The House, he was sure, under these circumstances, would be pleased to permit him to bring in this Bill, and he hoped sincereiy - that no local jealousy would interfere with a Bill which held out so many advantages to his unfortunate country. Ile would conclude by moving for leave to bring in this Bill. Mr. PLUNKETT seconded the motion. He considered the Company ought not to be prevented from obtaining a fair power; and they merely asked for that power which was every where allowed. He thought that such a monopoly as they sought for would create a competition that would in the end very much benefit the public. Sir M. S. STE WART would stand on the forms of the House in opposing the motion. At that advanced period of the Session he conceived it very improper to introduce a pri vate Bill so many weeks after the time allowed by the House. With reference to the Bill itself, he would merely remark that it contained the objectionable principle which the House before refused to sanction. Mr. M. PHILLIPS, before giving any vote on the ques tion, wished to know how the amalgamation of proprietors could be prevented in the new and old Companies,-which would have the effect of ridding both of all responsibility vilatsoever. Mr. O'CONNELL said his object was to .have the facts fairly before the House; he was therefore anxious that the Bill should be read a first time. Lord P. EGERTON strongly supported the motion, and hoped the House would allow the Bill to be read a first time. From his connection with Lancashire he could say that this Company had confer cod great benefit upon Ireland. Sir H. PARNELL contended that the present Bill would be very detrimental to the interests of the old subscribers, whose interests would be compromised by it. Dr. BOWRING hoped the House would not 'sanction indirectly what could not be done directly. At this late period of the session the details of the measure could not be possibly discussed. It was quite clear that a number of persons with unli mited responsibility were about to be grafted upon persons with a 1i ra1 . ,••14 responsibility, and there must be much contradiction and difficulty in arranging so complicated a memure. Under all the circumstances, he thought the wisest and best course for the House would be to reject the Bill.—( Cries of "divide.") After a few words from Lord SANDON in support of the Bill, Lord CL E NIE NT S rose amid cries of divide. This was the first Company that established steam boats as trading vessels, and it was now proposed that the Scotch Companies should come in and carry off the benefits they were entitled to derive. This was a most peculiar case, and he was sure this manoeuvre would not be permitted by the House. Sir GE ORG E CLERK thought the question for the House was, whether there was sufficient to justify the House in adopt ing the novel and unprecedented course, that when a private Bill had been thrown out to endeavour to introduce it again in an , other shape. He thought there ought to be minute inquiry into the necessity of the case before such a measure was allowed to be adopted. • Under these circumstances he felt bound to vote for the amendment. Mr. YOUNG thought that the promoters of this Bill had cause to regret that they had not manifested the same discre tion as the Hon. and Learned Member who had introduced it. They had supported it on a principle which he was per fectly prepared to controvert; although he would at that mo ment abstain from doing so. Either this Bill was or was not the same in principle, differing only in the manner in which it was to be carried into effect, as the one rejected. If it were the same, that was a sufficient motive for rejecting it. If it were not the same, then it was incumbent on those who intro duced it to show cause for the introduction of this Bill at a period when they had not complied with the Standing Orders. This had not been stated, but the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had told them that if they rejected this Bill, they would inflict very great injury on Ireland.—(Hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL could not but complain bitterly of those who would not allow him to put a Bill on the table, when every man might see what the Bill was, and yet would argue against him on the contents of it. If the Bill contained a different principle from what he stated it did ; and if it did not work out that principle completely, then Hon. Members might reject it. All he required was that he might be allowed to bring in the Bill, and then he would demonstrate to the House what the principle was. Then as to the point of form—it could not be denied that there was a Company that had done extreme service to Ireland—no Company ever did more ; no Company ever did so much. ft had been said that he had ob jected to capital being sent to Ireland, but here was an opportunity afforded for sending capital to Ireland. It appeared on all sides of the house that sufficient notice had been given, and he would be willing to give up the Bill the moment it was found to contain the principle objected to before by the llouse. , . ✓ Mr. WM. ROCHE supported the motion. Lord SANDON would feel himself at liberty to oppose the third reading of the Bill, if hereafter it appeared to contaiu the principle before decided by the House. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw and the house divided, when the numbers were— For the Motion Against it MAjority The Bill was then read a first time. Mr. SC A RLETT presented a petition against the Eastern Counties Railway Bill. _ _ _ Mr. MARK PHILLIPS presented a petition in favour of the Manchester and Salford Junction Canal Bill. Mr. CLAY moved the further consideration of the Report on the Birrniughaln, Bristol, and 'Thames Jurictio.l Railway 13.11. THE LADIES. Mr. G. BERKELEY wished to put a question the No ble Lord (Lord J. Russell). He understood the Government bad undertaken that a portion of the strangers gallery be provi ded for the reception of ladies by the ist'of June. If his under standing was correct, he would withdraw the motion of which he had given notice. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, as the Hcuse lad twice sanctioned the project be would nut oppose the motion of his lion. Friend. Ile b:lieved the arrangements might be made during the holidays. Sir C. KNATCHBULL inquired whether the Govern ment had, in considering the subject, given any consideration to the probable expr-use of the alteration ? Lord JOHN 1:.0 SE LL thought that the House having twice decided that the conv:nience should be given, Govern ment should propose an estimate for the purpose of car rying it into effect. If, however, he had followed his own inclination, he should not have acceded to it. Sir ROBERT INGLIS said that the House having twice decided in its favour and once against it, it was probable if it was brought a fourth time before the House, that they would be equal.—( A latv,h.) PAUPER. LUNATICS. Mr. CHICHESTER. wished to ad; . . the Noble Lord Lt the head of the Home Deprtment, whether it was the intention of his Mljesty's rdinisfers to bring in a Bill in the course of the present session, for the better care red maintcnace of pauper lunatic 2. The only in ducement he had for putting the question was humanity on be half of the unfortunate lunatics themselves. Lord J. It was quite ready to admit that the clause in the Poor Law Act respecting pauper lunatics had led to some inconvenience and some suffering en that subject ; but until he hai fully consulted the Poor Law Commissioners, he would not pledge himself to bring forward any Bill upon the subject. Sir T. FREMANTLE wishel also to put a question to the Noble Lord, which was, whether the Government intended to extend the time for the repayment of loans for the building of workhouses from ten to 20 years, and whether it was their intention to reduce the interest on those loans lower than to four per cent ? . . Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Government did not deem it advisable to reduce the interest below four per cent. ; and with regard to the extension of the time from ten to twenty years, he had no doubt where parties were anxious that the time should be extended, and made application to that effect, that the extended time would he grauted.--(Hear.) IRISH TITHES BILL: Sir R. PEEL wished to know what course the Noble Lord intended to pursue with respect to the Irish Tithes Bill? Lord J. RUSSELL wished rather to ask the Right Hon. Baronet what course he meant to pursue ? He understood the Right Hon. Bart. to say he thought it desir able that the Irish Tithe Bill should not be read a second time till an opportunity was afforded of sending it to Ireland, and obtaining some opi nion upon it. If that were still the view of the Right Hon. Baronet, there would not be sufficient time to send the Bill to Ireland, and have it considered there before the holidays, and he (Lord John Russell) would in that case defer the second reading till after the holidays—say to the 30th of the present month. If, on the contrary, the Right Hon. Bart. did not take the same view of it, he had no wish to postpone it. Sir R. PEEL did take the same view of it, and that without reference to this particular Bill, but to all Bilis. When mea sures of such importance were brought forward, it was only fair that a sufficient interval should be suffered to elapse to allow of its recommendations to be taken into consideration. He thought it better, therefore, that under present circumstances, the second reading of this Bill should be deferred tili after the holydays. Lord J. RUSSELL thought it reasonable that the second recond reading should be postponed ; and therefore he would make no objection to it. He would postpone it to Monday, the 30th of May, or to the 2d of June. Sir R.. PEEL thought that there was generally a thin at tendance on the first day of meeting, and that therefore one or two days after would better suit the general convenience. Lord J. RUSSELL would postpone it till Wednesday, .the Ist of June. OFFICERS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. WARBURTON brought up the Report of the Com mittee appointed to inquire into the fees, &c. of the officers of the House. Mr. HUME gave notice that he would, as soon as the Report was printed, submit to the House a resolution, with a view of carrying it into effect, and of taking the opinion of the House upon its recommendationa. TITLES TO ESTATES.—ADJOURNED DEBATE. The Order of the Day having been read for resuming the debate on this question, Mr. PEASE proceeded to address the House, but from the noise occasioned by lion. Members leaving their places, his observations did not fully reach the gallery. He was under stood to object to the dmendment, and to support the original resolutions, which was was only, in his opinion, an act of justice both to the landed proprietors and to the rail way companies. He was surprised to hear the terms of the amendment, which were in point of fact relieving the railway companies from the contract into whith they had entered, and which he trusted would not receive the assent of the House. Mr. TOO RE said the object of the present proposition was to protect landowners from the extortion of Railway Com panies, but he thought the Railway Companies required some protection from the extortion of the landed proprietors. There were many curious instances of that extortion on re cord, and even so far back as the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, a landowner, not content with obtaining an enormous sum as compensation for what he considered an intolerable nuisance, actually demanded and was:paid 500/. to build his house elsewhere, alleging that he could not live so near the railway, and yet, after the railway was finished, he enlarged his house, for the purpose of having a better view of it. The landowners were fully capable of defending themselves, with out this additional protection, which would be in its operation very injurious to the interests of public companies. Mr. 11 UM E thought the matter was one of very great im portance, and ought to be well and seriously considered in a Committee. He objected to both propositions as being too exclusive. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL would not agree to the proposition of the Hon. Member who moved the resolutions, though he could not support the amendment of the Member for Truro. Mr. D. W. HARVEY believed the question could be best considered in Committee. Sir M. W. RIDLEY thought that the time of the House would be saved by referring this Resolution to a Committee, where it might be fairly and properly argued and decided. He had no objection that it should be referred to the same Committee as the resolution of his' Hon. Friend. Mr. AGLIONBY thought the question was one well worthy the consideration of the House. He did not think it a subject fur a Committee. The question was one of principle, upon which, after a Committee of ten or fifteen Members had decided, the House would be as much abroad as it was now.—( Hear.) The suggestion of the Hon. Member, that there should be some plan to enable the parties through whose land the railways should go, to make a title, without going through that strict investigation which was generally gone through where the parties were willing, vendor and vendee. He was surprised at the statements of the So'icitor-General, that thz,ie was no necessity for the provision proposed by the Hon. Member for South Durham, because the Jaw as it now stood enabled parties to re- THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, MAY 10, 1836. cover the sums to which they were entitled by a jury. A jury was sammoned to decide, and in most cases they de cided upon the value of the land before the title was in vesti , ated. The title was the next matter that catrie to consideration.' He called upon the House to interfere in some way, and he would leave with the House to say which was the most .likely to give that protection that ought to be afforded. After a few words from the ATTORNEY-GENERAL and Mr. HARLAND, Mr. G. J. HE ATHCOTE called upon the House to pro tect the vast number of small farmers and proprietors in the county he represented, whose property would be much affected by the vast number of railways which passed through it. The Gallery was then cleared for a division. For the Resolutioa Against it Majority for the resolution --16 was rejected, and a measure introduced by the Govern ment, having for its object the protection of children up to certain ages, and a restriction upon the hours of working. After the Ist of March, 1835, children under twelve years of age were restricted to working eight hours each day ; and from the Ist of March, 1836, children between twelve and thirteen were confined to the same hours. His sole object was to leave the law as it stood on the Ist of March last, and to permit children after attaining the age of twelve, to work for twelve hours each day. The grounds on which he acted were, that they had in the report of the Inspectors their unanimous opinion that it would be impossible to enforce the law as it stands. Be sides, they had it not only from the reports of the Inspec tors, but also from the parties opposing the Bill, that the ne cessary consequence of enforcing the law must be to throw out of employment all the childreu between 12 and 13 years of age. The Bill of 1833 went upon the principle that chil dren of this age should be employed upon the relay system of eight hours. Experience had proved that that system could not be carried into effect in many districts—in some large towns it had worked well ; but in other places it was impossible to get the requisite num ber of children. Then came the question, how far it was de sirable for the House—how far it was expedient at once to put an end to the working of so large a portion of children as there would be thrown out of employment if this Bill were not passed ? The effect of the clause as it now stood would he to throw from 25,000 to 30,000 children at once out of employ ment in the Mills, and they would have no chance of getting it i n any other way. He knew that there were two parties opposed to the Bill ; one of them was represented by his Noble Friend (Lord Ashley), who, for the sake of humanity, were against the present Bill. Upon grounds of humanity he was not afraid to meet the Noble Lord—would it not be a better un derstood humanity if children, who were protected up to the age of 12 only to 8 hours, were after that allowed to work 69 hours a week ? He had taken the opinion of forty-eight indifferently chosen medical men upon the print, and from 43 of them he had in answer that if the chil dren were well fed and clothed, the work would be no detri ment to them. From five he had a contrary opinion—but it was to be borne in mind that there were forty three to five. He would assert, upon the interests of well understood huma nity, it was better not to prevent them working sixty nine hours, when the other alternative was that they were to be thrown out of employment altogether : upon the grounds of humanity alone, he thought the insertion of the clause he proposed was advisable.—( Hear, hear.) But there was another party who entertained opposition to this Bill upon different grounds : he did not think the present stage of the proceedings was the proper time in which they should put forward their opposition. He knew it would be put forward, and therefore he took the liberty of adverting to it. That party was not the party who should not look to the protection of the children, or restrict their labour even when under twelve years of age, but it was those who were anxious to get up again the question and imposition of restriction upon the labour of adults down to ten hours a day.—(Cries of Hear.) Now he would put it to his Friend opposite, which would better the state of those , whom he wished to protect, if the desire of that party were carried into effect?—( Hear, hear.) Why, the Ten Hours Bill carried with it the principle that children were to work as long as adults, they, instead of being protected, would be subjected to severe hours of labour. He trusted, therefore, that the ten hours' Bill would not be prominently put forward now ; but whether it was to be brought for.vard now, or at any other time, he should protest against it, on the ground that it would be doing injury to the manufacturers of the country in a great degree, but ten-fold injury to those for whose benefit it was intended to be enacted. In bringing Pee subject forward,he put out of consideration altogether the in terests of trade, and looked only at the question with reference to the interests of the children and the oper :tires themselves. This had been called protection. He denied that it was so ; and, as regarded the operatives, lie considered it most tyrannical. 'rho capital and industry of the country would find their way to foreign lands, and those oho think themselves advocates for the cause of the operatives, would, when it is too late, find their grievous error. They did not at present find it easy to compete with foreign manufacturers—how much more diffi cult then will it be when the capital and machinery of Great B:iteie shall have found their way to foreign shores? --( Hear, hear.) Then the great mass cf the working classes would seek, but in rain, for employment, and it would nut do to tell them, when theywere ceavinss for bread, that the law might then be repealed. He did not think it the opinion of the operatives themselves, that they were anxious for the proposi tion put forward by those who found it their interest to come up to London, and to he band in glove with Mem bers of Parliament.—( ilear, hear.) The proposition that they could obtain for ten hours labour the wages of twelve hour's work was so absurd that no man echo knew the condition of the working classes, and the feelings of the manufacturers, could do otherwise than laugh at and condemn it. If it was tire desire of the House to call upon the Government to enforce the law, why, of course, the Government would act in o'eedience to that decision. But in his opinion they would certainly have great reason to regret the adoption of such a course. He had no wish to open this factory ques tion ; but if Hon. Members proposed amendments, he would not shrink from his duty, but would oppose the amendments in every stage s and he now called upon the House to support him in setting this question at rest. Lord ASHLEY did not often trespass on the attention of the House ; and after his defeat in 1833, he had care fully abstained from coming before the House. He had asked no questions, he had moved for no returns, end he had determined to give the Bill introduced by his Majesty's government a fair trial. —( Hear, hear.) But his Majesty's Government had done the reverse. Hear, hear.) So far from giving their own Bill a fair trial, that having brought in a measure to come into operation by a certain time, within nine days of that time, his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Poulett Thomson) came down to that House, and gave notice that he would bring in a Bill for the repeal of one of the clauses of the Bill, and for the reformation of his own le gislation.—( Hear.) The main ground of this reformation was, the report of the Inspectors, for the House had no other evi-, dence on which to regulate their conduct. The only question now for the House to discuss was, whether they would, by their solemn decision, say that 12. hours of labour was the best limit to which children of all ages, from 9 to 13, were to be subjected ? This was the only point of discussion, and to that he would keep. He was asking nothing new—nothing but that which the House by a large majority declared to be permanent. The Right Hon. Gentleman seid that the only object he had in view was the good of the children. He ( Lord A.) only doubted whether the alteration proposed by his Right lion. Friend would work good. 'His Right Hon. Friend also said that 30,000 children would be dismissed from em ployment, if the clause this Bill sought to repeal came into operation. He had not such opportunity as his Right Honourable Friend of learning what would be the probable effect of this clause ; but he had taken great pains to learn the result of its operation, and he could state, with all humility, as the result of his inquiries, that this dismissal of children was absolutely impossible. The Noble Lord then proceeded at great length to refer to various parts of the evidence taken before the Factory Commissioners, to show that the children were unable to endure such long hours of labour as those proposed by the present Bill. The Right Hon. Gentleman had given a pledge that children from twelve to thirteen should not be employed for the num ber of hours a day during which the Bill before the House allowed them to be employed. Would the country be satis fied that the Right Hon. Gentleman had redeemed that pledge when they found that those poor children had enjoyed the pro , mise for two years and a half, but the performance for only nine months? But it was said that the interests of the master manufacturers required the change. By the Act regulating negro labour it was provided that the negroes should work only forty-five hours in the week. What , would be said if his Majesty's Ministers were to come down to the House and de clare that the planters stated that they could not go on unless the negroes were compelled to work for twelve hours a day instead of eight? He ( Lord Ashley) confessed that there was something in the Bill beyond what he had stated which excited his suspicions. Why was it that the Right Hon. Gentleman proposed but one amendment to the existing law ? All the reports and statements to which the Right Hon. Gentleman bad referred enforced the necessity of seve ral amendments. Of those amendments that now proposed was not the most prominent. Among other things it had been said that it was found absolutely necessary to violate the existing Act. Why, the same supposed necessity would continue if this Bill were to pass. On this and other grounds, he very much feared that the -Right Hon. Gentleman's Bill was merely put forth as a kind of feeler. He was appre hensive that if that Bill were passed, it would, at a future pe riod, be argued, " Having repealed so much of the law, the House, in consistency, must consent to proceed further." In confirmation of this opinion he (Lord Ashley) adverted to the evidence before the Committee on the state of manufactures and commerce of Mr. William Rathbone Greig, of Man chester, who stated that after all the attempts at legislation on the subject had failed, he had no doubt the mill-owners would be found to concur in the resolution not to work the children employed by them much more than twelve hours in the day. He repeated, therefore, that he could not help sus pecting the present proposition was merely a feeler. Now, although he hoped that he was not improperly pertinacious, he felt it to be his duty, and in fact a matter of conscience, however ready he might be to surrender the law, not to sur render the principle. If any Member of his Majesty's Go vernment would say that he was prepared to provide a substi tute for the regulation which the present Bill went to repeal, he (Lord Ashley) would withdraw his opposition to the Bill, and allow it to go to a second reading. But if not, he should certainly persevere in his opposition. He would now, there fore, move, as an amendment, that the Bill be read a second time this day six months; inasmuch as there being only a choice of evils, he preferred inconveniencing the masters to inflicting cruelty on the children.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. POULTER seconded the Noble Lord's amendment. The absence of all petitions on the subject was a complete answer to all the anxieties and apprehensions which the Right Hon. the President of the Board of Trade had ex pressed on the subject. The evil was that mill-owners were running a race of competition, to which the interests of the poor children were to be sacrificed. Having been deserted by their natural protectors, it became the duty of the House to stand in loco parentutri. That such excessive labours as that required of them was not necessary, was proved by several instanees, and especially by the case of a factory in Bradford, in which 1,763 persons were employed, 616 of whom were under eighteen years of age ; and yet only ten hours' attendance was required from each, one hour of which was allotted to instruction—an admirable example, and one which ought to be generally followed. Instead of asking the House to reduce the existing law, the Right Honourable Gentleman ought to require its enforcement. At present it was grossly violated. He knew nine factories in one town in which it was grossly violated. In those factories they had compelled the children to siork on Grad Friday. There was a clause in the existing Act which provided that the children should have eight half-holidays in the year. Now, it such a day as Good Friday was taken from the children, what chance was there that they would be allowed any of those half-holi days? In some factories means were taken to evade the law, by making children look older than they were. Children of eleven years of age were made to look as if they were thir teen. These things ought to be looked to, and the law be en forced, not relaxed. If there wete not inspectors enough, let the number be increased, let their visits be more frequent, and let those visits be made at times when they were not ex pected. The effect of excessive labour on young females es pecially, destined to be the mothers of families, was very per nicious. It endangered their health, and produced distortion and debility. Baron Humboldt declared that in a million of savages lie did not see a single deformed person. How diffe rent was the case in our manufacturing districts ! In almost every case, personal deformity was acquired, not original. Whenever the laws of nature were violated, she revenged her self by gradually deteriorating large classes of the people. The education of these unfortunate children ought to be more attended to. Unless previously educated, it was im possible to bring together young people of both sexes, with out demoralization. And yet, at the time most important for their moral and religious instruction, they were left without a chance of improvement, Luring the week they had no time, and on Sundays they were too much ex hausted to attend any school. He was a great friend to political reforms; but political reforms should always be accompanied by the moral education of the people. If not, those reforms would be misused, and would be turned to evil. It was on that ground alone that he had supported the political reforms which had taken place during the last few years. It was in the hope that the privileges which those re forms conferred upon the people, they would be taught to use beneficially to themselves. He trusted the House would never consent to the Bill proposed by the Right Hon. Gentleman. He (Mr, Poulter) was no politician on the present occasion. He was much attached politically to his Majesty's present Go vernment ; but he was much more attached to the poor factory children.—( Hear, hear. ) Mr. GI SBORNE was desirous of stating the views which he entertained on this subject. He greatly admired the tem. perate and candid manner in which the Noble Lord had ex pressed his sentiments respecting it, and he trusted that he (Mr. Gisborne) should be actuated by the same spirit, and give no utterance to any party feeling or sarcasm. It was ne cessary to consider what was the existing state of the law. He agreed with his Right 'Hon. Friend that it was only on the ground that the existing law had the effect of turning out of work all the children who were between 12 and 13 years of age, that the proposed Bill should be acceded to. It was a fact, however, that the system of relays, on which so much expectation had been built, had failed. Not more than 5 per cent. of the children had been so employed. The simple question was, whether, if the existing regulations operated well with respect to children from the age of ten to eleven, and from the age of eleven to twelve, they should not be ap plied to children from the age of twelve to thirteen, who would otherwise be turned out of employment, with the exception of about five per cent. It was well known that from Bucking hamshire and other agricultural districts, many families had re moved into manufacturing districts, with a view of obtaining employment for their children. It was also well known that children in the factories, from twelve to thirteen years of age, could frequently earn from four to seven shillings a week each. HoW would the inducement for persons in the agricultural districts to romove into the manufacturing districts, for the purpose of obtaining employment for their children, be reduced, if the law which occasioned the dismissal of so many children of twelve years of age were continued? To accede to the amendment of the Noble Lord would be to prevent the removal of families to which he had alluded being beneficivi to either party. Much mere misery, there fore, would be created by prohibiting than by allowing chil dren from twelve to thirteen years of age to work twelve hours a day. The amount of misery so produced was so great, that the House ought to pause before it continued it. On these grounds he should cordially assent to the second reading of the Bill. Mr. BENETT could never for a moment admit that any loSs which the manufacturers might sustain ought to be put in comparison wish injury to the health and morals of the chil dren employed in the manufactories. Much was said of the danger of throwing so many children of that age out of em ployment. How could such a danger exist, wen new facto ries were starting up in every quarter, and such a rivalship was created among thorn? On the contrary, he believed that at present children of the age in question could earn more in eight hours than they formerly did in twelve. Nothing, in his opinion, could be more fallacious, unjustifiable, and wicked than to consider wealth, even in a great commercial nation like England, as that which, under any circumstances, ought to be put in comparison with the health and morals of the people.—( Hear, hear. ) Dr. BO WRING gave the Hon. Member for Wiltshire all honour for his sympathy with, and interference in favour of, the labouring population. But if it appeared that the Hon. Gentleman's opposition to the Bill before the House would be injurious instead of beneficial, then that opposition be came unjustifiable. Now the fact was, that every de scription of interference, so far from ameliorating always deteriorated the condition of those in whose behalf it was exercised. The country of Europe in which the labouring population were in the most healthy and prosperous state was Switzerland. Half the labourers in that country were the possessors of the land they tilled. Their condition re solved the great question of free trade, the principles of which, after all, must be applied, in order to solve all difficul ties of this kind in legislation. The assertion that the children in the manufacturing districts were comparatively uninstructed was unfounded. No lion. Member who compared the child ren in the manufacturing towns with the children in the agricul tural districts but must see the superiority of the former.— (No, no.) He repeated that the town children were undoubt edly the more instructed, the more intellectual, the more virtuous.—(A laugh.) Let those who doubted the superiority of the morals of the manufacturing to the morals of the agricul tural districts look at the bastardy returns, and they would be convinced of the fact. Mr. BROTHERTON considered it to be the bounden duty of the Legislature to regard in all their proceedings the physical, the moral, and the intellectual condition of the great mass of the people; and he could never believe that the prosperity of this or of any country could dep en d on th e con tinued violation of the principles of justice and humanity.— ( Hear.) Let any one who was well acquainted with the subject get up and say that the number of hours of working p ro p ose d by the Right Hon. Gentleman's Bill was not too much. He knew a good deal of the matter, and he said unequivocally that the labour was too much for children to bear.—(Hear.) When they considered that 400,000 or 500,000 persons were labouring from half-past five or six o'clock in the morning till eight or nine o'clock at night, and this, not upon a few particu lar occasions only, but day after day, week after week, and year after year, he asked whether any person professing the Christian religion would stand up as the advocate of such a system, or would express a wish that such a state of things should continue ?—( Hear, hear.) He begged the House to consider how frightful that state of society must be in which so many hundreds of thousands of human beings were regarded merely as machines, or instrumenis of labour, out of which the utmost possible degree of exertion should be extorted. Of what benefit was constant employment if opportunities were not afforded to them of moral and religious instruction, in or der that they might become good men and good women.— ( Hear, hear.) He held in his hand a Bill which was brought into Parliament in the year 1815, by the late Sir Robt. Peel, whose memory was held in grateful remembrance by the great mass of the labouring classes in the manufacturing districts. The object of that Bill was to limit the hours of labour for all persons working in factories to ten hours and a half a day. But the late Sir Robert Peel had, in 1815, and for many succeeding years, to struggle with the same difficulties as those who were friendly to a like humane measure were compelled to contend against now. He (Mr. Brotherton) was a master spinner at that time, and, he believed, he stood almost or quite alone in Manchester in rendering assistance to those who, with the late Sir R. Peel, were endeavouring to accomplish these benevolent intentions. With the exception of himself all the master spinners of Manchester were opposed to the measure. What was the consequence ? Sir Robert Peel was four years endeavouring to accomplish what he de signed, and at last, in 1819, he succeeded only in carrying a Bill which limited the period of labour to twelve hours a day, or 72 hours a week for all children under the age of 16 years. It was found, however, in the course of a very short time, that that part of the Bill which limited the application of the gene ral provisions of the Act to children under sixteen years of age, was likely to be evaded, and subsequent experience showed that it was evaded. The consequence of this was that in 1825 another Bill upon the subject was introduced and car ried, limiting the hours of labour to sixty-nine in the course of the week ; and in the year 1831 another Act was passed, called Sir John Hobhouse's Act, and which, for many reasons, he was always disposed to consider the very best Act that had ever been passed upon the subject. On e o f it s c hi e f recommen dations was its simplicity—it was easily u n de r stood, and could not eFsily . be evaded. That Act raised the age of persons working in factories i n th e d ay to e i g h teen years , an d prohi bited any person un d er t h e age o f twentv - one f rom wor ki ng in the night. The fault of Sir John HObhouse's Bill was, that i▪ t applied o n ly t o persons emp l o y e d i n co tt on factories— but its effects, wherever it was applied, were found to be most beneficial.—( Hear.) The cotton factories called, per haps, most loudly for the adoption of some measure of that descri▪ ption, but at the same 'time great excesses and many abuses were heard of in the woollen trade, and also in the silk manufactories ; and the late Mr. Sadler afterwards introduced a Bill which applied to all these alike. It was not, however, till the year 1833 that the existing Act was brought forward, and although he resisted some of the clauses of that measure, he must still claim the merit of consistency in opposing the Bill which was now brought forward, for altering one of its most important provisions. He told Lord Althorp, when the Bill of 1833 was under consideration, that the relay system would never do; and as the Bill passed through Committee he pointed out the provisions which lie was satisfied (and sub sequent experience showed he was correct) would be evaded. It could not be denied that the Bill had totally failed in many of the great objects for which it was intended. By the re turns it appeared that in the course of the very short time during which the law had been in operation, no less than 250 masters of mills had been convicted under the Act , and paid penalties to an amount of upwards of 1,000/.—( . liear, hear.) When it was co n sidered that these masters of =Ls were men of higher education, and as one would suppose of superior moral feelings, to those whom they employed , was it not dis graceful to find th em v i o lating an Act of Parliament so grossly and so constantly as these persoas appeared to ha ve done ?—( Heal, hear.) He repeated that .he considered such conduct most dis gr aceful.—( Hear.) In the m--jo..ity of in stances in which the penaltii s of the Act had been en f orce d, it was for the offence of compelling the children to work for more than twelve hours a day. If the masters were guilty of such infractions ei the law, 17ew •.(_ , ,1.,id tii, - ”: eKr ,- - , .. , .. = - and comparative) uneducated avii:ian to re7.peet la tiIC p er' visions . the visions of laws which probably they did not distinctly andel - stand ?—( Hear, hear.) How could the Legislature expect,.an, laws to be obeyed by the poor, when they were hour . l . a to daily violated by the rich ?—( Hear, bear.) He never lined to object to any measure unless he thought it was in his power ... suggest a remedy. 'This then was his remedy, that for all persons employed in fact.rins 1;1;--i.er the age trC =wnnty-ene, there should be one uniform period of ieYour.---f. Hear, hear.) The system on which the large factories ;vas conducted was such, that persons of all ages and all constitu tions, old acrd young, weak and strong, must all necessarily work together at one and the same time. Let the Legislature, therefore, fix upon some period of labour within the range and comp ass of human strength, and make it applicable t o all alike ; or at all events, to all p e rsons under the age of twenty-one. _ He though that the simplest and best law that co uld be passed upon the subject would be one by which the period of labour should be limited to ten hours a-day for persons of all a g es, men, women, and children.—( Hear, hear.) But when any,. proposition of this kind was made, whenever the voice of humanity interposed between the master and the labourer, the House was assailed with the cry of " beware of foreign corn petition—if you reduce the period of labour, you put a fatal restriction upon the British manufacturer, and render him incapable of competing with the manufactures of the Conti nent." Let the House remark how this assertion was borne r out by the fact. At the time of the passing of t he late Sir Robert Peel's Act, and in 1819, the exportation of co lts twist from this country amounted annually to 18,000,000 lbs.. The period of labour was again reduced in 1 825 , a nd than, or course, all idea of competing with foreign nations was at once abandoned. Yet the year afterwards the exportation of cotton twist amounted to 45,000,000 lbs.—( Hear, hear.) Again, in 1833, when a further reduction of time was effected, the saute argument was used, and nothing but positive and immediate_ ruin could fail on the heads of the devoted manufacturers of this country. What was the fact ? In 1834, the exportation of cotton twist amounted to 76,000,000 lbs. —( Cheer s. ) Facts proved, then, that tilt) , had nothing to fear from fore i g n corn petition.--( Hear, hear.) He differed from the Hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Dr. Bowring) and •others, who said—" only repeal the corn alws, and all laws bearing upon free trade .ini. 1 labour, - and then the people will be much better off, and vat I never be so unmercifully worked."—( Hear, hear.) All the inspectors agreed that if there were not legislative interference, the children employed in manufactories would be overworkea• —( Hear, hear.) And when free labour was talked about, let it never be forgotten that the labour of persons in these manu factories was not free.—( Hear, hear.) The Right R e ly Gentleman, the President of the Board a Trade, i n the course of the observations he made in moving the second raiding, threw out an intimation which he (Mr. Brotb erton) was most anxious to refute. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that the reason why the operatives wished for this rest ric tion was, that they might have twelve hours wages for tel,l hours work. It might, with just as much justice, be said that the masters, when they violated the law, and kept the children at work beyond the time prescribed by the Legisla tion, were anxious to get twelve or fourteen hours' work for ten hours' wages.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The'faet. was, that the Hou_sc was not aware of the great temptation that there ever was for over-working these persons. To man/ . master-manufacturers an additional hour a-day obtained from each of the persons he employed would make a diff ere nce of no less than 100/. a -week. Thus an enormous advantage was gained by those who violated the law, and the honest manu facturer was left without a chance of competing with them' —( Hear.) This would necessarily be the case till some uni form time was adopted for persons of all ages, and some effec tual steps taken to see that the provisions of the law were r ,`, - , gidly carried into execution.—( Hear.) If the present 1 3 '" for amending the last Act were passed, he had no doubt that many mills would he found working sixteen and seventeen hours a day. Persons engaged in these manufactories w er° generally desirous of making rapid fortun es , an d the Legis la : tore might as well expect to extract oil fr o m gran ite as to ow tain anything from the humanity of the wors hippers of mon mon.—( Hear.) He begged to bear his hu m ble be.t honest testimony against the existing system. Mr. G. F. YOUNG Viought that if the Bill now broug ht before them were to be entertained for a moment, that those by whom it was supp o rted we, e bound by conclu sive evidence to show that the period }bey and which the exten sion of protection would be prejudicial was exactly twelve , yea: s.—( Hear.) Mr. M. PHILIPS supported the measure proposed • by, bil Right Hon. Colleague. The fact w as that they must- des. with things as they found them. Amelioration, he admitted, ought to be carried to the utmost practicable extent; but for the sake of nominal ameliorations he was not disposed to ad here to a law which would take the bread o ut o f t he moialls°f thousands. He had seen a letter, written by the Hon. Mein' ter for Ashton-under- Lyne, in which it was s t a t e d that if I"" thirteen-year-old clause continued, 20,000 or 30,000 children, between the ages of 12 and 13 would be thrown cut of cm' ployment. Sir R. INGLIS congratulated his Majesty's G o vernme nt that they had at last got a gentleman wh o wa s c onnected w it '' t the manufacturing interest to rise and supp or t their pres en t proposition ; far only two Hon. Memb e r s connec t e d with t hat; interest had as yet supported it. He hoped that the divisi oll to-night would be in proportion to the nu.nber of speakers oil' each side of the question.—( Hear, h ear .) O n what gro tilw was it that the House was now called upon to deprive chil dren under the age of 13 years of that protection which the pres eli A t law gave them ? Mere assertion. The r e was no other gre w whatever. Mr. AINSWORTH supported the motion. It had been said that no petitions had been presented from the m%nuf turers. That might be the case; but th ere wer e several de putations from the manufacturing districts now in London' who united in stating that serious injury would accrue to the® and their property if the amen d e d Bill o f hi s Right 11 ° 11 ' Friend the President of th e B oar d o f T ra d e s hould not b ° carried. Dr. LUSHINGTON remembered M r . Canning say in g s when it was urged that gr ea t d anger mus t ar i s e from personii legislating for the West I n di es w h o were no t ac quainted wi th West India society, that they might a s we ll t e ll him that he w a : not to take part in legislation respecting the mines of C orry r wall, because he had never travell e d th roug h the tow n : at Truro. The Hon. Member for Kilmarnock had adrooa r , t the principle of free trade, as applicable to labour; but ei"; was the principle of free trade, he should like to know, riht . ' n . l o . came to be applied to children between twelve and thill e iii years of age ?—( Hear, hear.) Free trade was this, where t, parties were capable of judging for thems e lves, and of protlotil ing their own interests, in that case they had a 11 . 1 . right to say that the Legislature should not interfere with &ell own discretion and judgment, as the interest of each individal would induce him to adopt that course which, in the eon, mustpromote the general prosperity. The question, thirdfor the House to consider was, would they or not a° 0 _ legislative protection to those who were incapable of P r at _ tecting themselves? They had admitted the princ i p le n ,, ready by affording legislative protection to another ,'--- that could not protect themselves—namely the chifon.°Y; sweepers. If the chimney-sweepers required protectrn. would any man say that the children employed in 15 nt tories were less in need of it ? He defied the mo st arde, a advocate of free labour to state that eleven hours and 4 half's labour to children under thirteen years • of age was 0 ! .. destructive of their morals and their health. The rules of r_ . litical economy were totally inapplicable to the present ca se . They might be true as a general principle; but this was a t:. O of exception, and did not admit of their application. r.. would ask his Right Hon. Friend whether he was not lee, la ting for particular interests, rasher than for the He agreed with the Hon. Member for the University of u_ fO , ford, that the Bill brought forward in 1833 was the result of compromise, and he therefore considered the present measure to be a violation of the pledge given on that occasion. factory Mr. BAINES had been the whole of his life among t there general g0,..0d1i, labourers ; and he would take upon himself to say that was not a set of children in this kingdom better fed , r b . e e _ t . t ,, er lodged, and more healthy than the children in the facto 1 " o _ , (Hear, and cries of " Ohl") Previous to his coming to o t! a l l e don, he went to almost every factory in Leeds to , in; e rt, in what was the state of the health of the persons erar. o 7 a im , them, and if the House would give him credit for illdgc'hnifdren partially, he would declare that he never saw a set of sue __ 4ll who had more the appearance of great health and , Il. i ' le than those he then saw. He afterwards consulted It° masters, to ascertain whether they wished the time . extended, or the age of the children, as n ow req lurthe nega law, abridged ; and the answer he received was to parents 0 _ f thte tive. lie also put the same questions to the parcer re" . children employed in the factories, and the ansawbourought ceived from them was, " We think the hours of children ought to be abridged one hour, and the age of the the of" ' to be reduced from twelve years to ten." These waderceosulted• o c s a f b l (labou r ° o tt e r nions of the masters and the operatives whom Mr. POTTER supported the motion, and Britain to " of importation of cotton wool into Great ~_fl con do n e an d 371,000 bales, while the importation and siderable, Oa France and other States of Europe was inco%ant. In 1 8 _ 3 „, 2 , the cotton manufacture of America quite insigni.fi 865,u°' Britain was the consumption of cotton wool in Great 173,000 bales, bales; in the same year that of America was eroP h obe e h er . v ed . . t i h s at v t o s ea o r f ly E doub i, 2 o o f o F ,o r o a o ne ; e m o a 7 k 2 in ,4 g 6 i 3 n b a a ll le 6 s, 46 7 26 d 3 of hal o c t s h , er he S in t what was imported into Great Britain only sevent een into Gres I before, and two-third parts of what was imported consumPtsl} Britain in the same year of 1832. In 1835, 6 888 bales. of the States of America had increased to 21_ 2 Europe to bay° we suppose France and the other States of °portion, a pe gaetevrisenteen Year! increased their manufacture only in the samespar t tes wo uld b e the whole consumption of rival foreign 784,000 bales, while that of Great Britain that in trran t Y mated at 944,673 bales. Thus it appear had increased 00 years the foreign rival cotton manufacture, ar four-fifth parr!! much in amount as to consume in the last )eed in Great .13 i of the quantity of raw cotton wool that was used for 1835 like lire d not, tam during the same period. hhe ha t ifse" Sir JO HN ELLEY said that althoug isitcd the inall s Hon. Member for Leeds (Mr. Baines). h v e bad ever witnre. turing towns lately, he could not say that . wh e n. tb ru d the in them a redundancy of health.—( flear,.thesermon en troe he was a scarcity of employment manyote'etel Ontothe ,sub.)e„et'gre army, and having had some exyerte._ . is esti ct select - te n Out of every 0 Id reject five I cl: trice h nadier. A recruiting officer won . would never go to a manufacturing district , in a rut** is Hear -) men in a manufacturing district, , --( for th e would not reject a greater not an advocate at too Mr. CHARLES VILLIERS was m any hours a daY , __° r csa ries employment of the children for too h uties on the l'e c ra — a to ' He would repeal t e arable the poor early- an age. and thus of life, especially on corn, Cheers.) • i - 0 0 0 proportion than work as long as he pleased.—( . a 5..___,,00 of he dis, one in ten. Colonel THOMPSON felt in Tl e r- v u . ,„ ci h e sh T o o cu e to oP something should oe • heir ore eorr please somebody ; but unlesssfsor leaYO: tbiug s is t difficulty, fearing that whichever way h his opinion, he should vote HOUSE OF LORDS. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at the usual hour. The LORD-LIEUTENANT of Ireland took his seat shortly afterwards on the Ministerial benches, and was warmly congratulated by several Noble Lords. His Excellency ap peared in good health and spirits. SALE . OF BREAD. The Duke of RICHMOND brought up the report of the Committee of this Bill. PUNISHMENT OF DEATH. Earl TANKERVIL LE presented a petition against the infliction of the punishment of death, except in cases of mur der. Also a petition from the owners and occupiers of land in the county of Norfolk, on the subject of agricultural dis tress. HANDLOOM WEAVERS. Earl ROSEBERY presented a petition from the Hand loom Weavers of Ayr, complaining of distress. Also a peti tion from the corporation of merchants (Edinburgh) in favour of the Edinburgh Poor Bill. SCOTCH ENTAIL BILL. The Earl of H ADDINGTON presented a petition against the Scotch Entail Bill. MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS. A deputation of Members from the Commons appeared at the Bar, and brought up several private Bills. FACTORIES. Liwd BURLINGTON - Fresent;Fa petition from York, praying - that an alteration might be made in the Factory Bill, and that children under nine years of age should not be com pelled to work more than six hours a day. _ REGISTRATION OF VOTERS BILL. The Marquis of L A N SD 0 WNEgave notice that he should on Friday next move the second reading of the Registration of Voters Bill. SCOTCH ENTAIL BILL. The Earl of ROSE BERR Y, in moving the second reading cf the Scotch Entail Bill, in consequence of subject having - been so recently before the House, would not trouble the House by entering at any length into the subject, the principal objects of th' Bill having been stated when the measure was first introduced. The Noble Earl then stacd the substance of the different provisions of the Bill, which be believed would be satisfactory to the public generally.—( Hear, hear, hear.) That the law regarding entails in existence could be done away with, he was not prepared to say; but of this he was convinced, that the time would soon arrive when a much larger re laxation of the law of entail would take place than that which was proposed by the measure then before the House. He solicited their Lordships' consent to the Bill, believing it to be a measure that would be of great benefit to all indivi duals who were interested in entailed property. and of great benefit to the public at large. The Noble Lord concluded by moiling the second reading of the Bill. Earl MANSFIE LD did not o!ijeet to the principle of the Bill, parts of it ‘Vfl2 very important and extremely useful, while there were other tarts that very much reiuired amend ment in Committee. If the 'Bill passed in its eriginal shape it would destroy all entails. The Duke of BUCCLEUG Itwas not aware of any law which prevented capitalists from expending capital in Scotland. lie would act oppose the second reading-, Iu: he hoped it would ha considered siith clole attention in Ccmmittee. (LEFT SITTING.) LONDON MARKETS-TilIS DAY. (From the New London Price Current.) COTTON.—This article is for the • present completely nog- Icc!ed, not a transaction reported since this day week. The sales at Liverpool since Monday last are 18,190 bales, at barely former prices. The public sales for Friday arc all withdrawn, an account'of the heavy state of the Market. SALTPETRE.—In Rough a good deal hes been done at better prices than could have been formerly obtained. NITRATE OF SODA.—Parcels sold last week at 205., have been re-sold at 21s. WooL.—ln Foreign 'Wools there has been iitee done since Friday, owing to arrivals of the nevi eli, Wing close at hand ; prices arc firm. SkLTER. —The prices have advanced to 19'. lOs. a 20/. on the spot, and about the same for delivdry ; the purchases are very ex'ensive, 2,500 tons taken-alone for France. TURPENTINE.—Spirits are dull of sale, and Is. loNer. In rough, purchases made IBs. 61. per cwt. TEA.—The M whet remains steady, and but little business doing, the buyers waiting for the sales of about 42,000 pack ages, which are to take place on the 17th inst. The sales on the 17th consist of 42,071 pkgs Tea; a great part of the Congou in these sales arc fine wiry blackish leaf ; we shall give all the particulars of the quantity and anticipated prices on Friday. The total deliveries of all descriptions of Tea from the warehouses on which duty has been paid, for the week ending May 7th, are 455,370 lbs. RICE.—The home trade have purchased Carolina Rice freely at 295. Some parcels have also been taken for shipping at 20s. The holders of East India not being free sellers at previous rates, and the market being indifferently supplied, little has been done. On.s.—Extensive sales of southern Oil have been made for the north of Scotland since our last report at fully former rates. In all other descriptions of Fish Oils more business has been done, and the prices of pale Seal and CA Oil have improved lOs. to 20s. The late decline in the prices of Lin seed Oil has led to a great deal of business, more particularly for exportation. Rape continues still to decli,e in value. LAC DlE.—This article continues to sell well at ld. advance on previous rates. . _ _ PaovistoNs.—The prices of Dutch Butter of fine quality have advanced 2s. a 45., there has been a considerable demand for the Manchester and Liverpool markets, the town trade have also purchased very freely, 06 paid for Freizland, the quantity arrived since this day week, is 7,200 casks. Irish Butter has sold freely, bat at prices Is. to 2s. under our former quotations—Cork selling at 865., Limerick 84s. The trans actions in the Bacon Market hate been extensive, 535. to 545. paid for prime small Waterford landed ; the prices on the other side are now equal to 565. on board. In bale and tierce middles a considerable business done, and prices have advanced 4Ss. to 495. landed. Lard sells extensively at the advanced quotations. In Hams there is more doing. Russ, BRANDY AN HOLLANDS.—RUM continues in ex tensive and general request for home use as well as for shipping, and prices are still on the advance; Lcewards and Jamaicas of fine quality now rate at Id a 2d higher than on Tuesday last; all other descriptions are rather dearer, fur proof Leewards 2s. 3d. is now asked ; 400 puns Jamaica sold 30 to 40 per cent. ouer at 3s. 9d. and 4s. ld. ; 250 puncheons Lcewards 6 to 18 per cent. over, 2s. 41-d. and 2s. 10d., and a parcel of Demerara, 34 to 36 der cent., 3s. 6d. and 3s. 9d. Brandy is in good request by the home trade. Geneva continues dull of sale, at ls. Ild. for the best. INDIGO.—There is still little doing in the Market, and the prices are not so firm as they were; the deliveries continue extensive, particularly for exportation to St. Petersburg and Hambro. The deliveries of Indigo last week were 800 chests. The total deliveries of Iniigo from the warehouses for the week ending May 7, are 23,116 lbs. of East India, and 2,078 lbs. of West India. Total imports into London and Liverpool from Ist January, to 9th May, 1836, 2068 tons. Total home consumption, same time, 3107 tons. Exports, 586 tons. Total deliveries, 3693. tons. Increase of deliveries over imports, 1625 tons. Stock in bond, 9th May, 1836, 2800 tons. The Company's sale of 485 tons this morning went off with much spirit at an advance of Is. a ls. 6d., refraction 41 to 44, selling at 28s. 61. a 305., but mostly at 295. 6d.; the chief part supposed to have been taken on speculation. COCOA.--There is little demaod for West India Cocoa at present ; at auction 515 pkgs., nearly all taken in 2s. ucdcr former rates, Trinidad at 535. a 565. 6d. ; Grenada good and fine red 525. a 535. 6d. It is reported that small sales of Brazil have beep made at 375. a 385. The total deliveries of West India Cocoa from the warehouses for the week ending May 7th are 14,2701b5. TALLow.—There is a steady demand for parcels on the spot at full prices. Holders are firm for delivery ; few sellers at 455. to 455. 3d. The accounts from St. Petersburgh still state prices high, they being equal to 475. od. for new Tallow in this market, the supply this season is now estimated at 99,000 casks. There is a considerable business doing- in Tallow this afternoon on the spot at 435. 9d. ; the demand is princi pally from the Soap makers, on account of the short supply of all descriptions of grease. • IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 9 FACTORIES ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Mr. P. THOMPSON would have simply rn3vod the se coad reading of this Bill , reserving to himself th 3 right of replying to any objections that should be made to it, if it were entleman mi not for a misconception of opinion r that hafl gone a b roa d respecting the nature of the Bills. .Chat misconception h e was the more surprised at becatue the Bill spoke for it se lf. (Hear.) The Bill, a s any g g t see, con sisted of one single clause, . and to any o ne w h o had attended to the Bill ill its progress t h roug h that House, or who had attended to the discussions upon it, it must be perfectly clear that the only object he had i n v i ew was clauseto repeal one single of the Bill as it stood, and to pla ce the law as regarded the future on the same foo ting on which it stood on the Ist of March last year. The Bill w hi c h passed in 1 835, provided for the protection of children in factories. At that time a Bill was introduced, i n w hi c h it was attempted to restrict the hours of labour for adults, or at least for young persons coming within th ose classes who might be Considered as able to judge whether they wished to work or not—how long they were inclined to work—and whether for one period of time or another ? Hear, hear.) The measure thus proposed by the No:3:e Lr,r,l the Member for Dorsetshire (Lord Ashley)